PCE Working Group D. Dhody
Internet-Draft Y. Lee
Intended status: Informational Huawei Technologies
Expires: September 6, 2018 D. Ceccarelli
Ericsson
March 5, 2018
Applicability of Path Computation Element (PCE) for Abstraction and
Control of TE Networks (ACTN)
draft-ietf-pce-applicability-actn-05
Abstract
Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) refers to the set of
virtual network (VN) operations needed to orchestrate, control and
manage large-scale multi-domain TE networks so as to facilitate
network programmability, automation, efficient resource sharing, and
end-to-end virtual service aware connectivity and network function
virtualization services.
The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides
mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path
computations in response to Path Computation Clients (PCCs) requests.
This document examines the applicability of PCE to the ACTN
framework.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2018.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Path Computation Element (PCE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.1. Role of PCE in SDN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.2. PCE in multi-domain and multi-layer deployments . . . 4
1.2. Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) . . . . . . 4
1.3. PCE and ACTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2. Architectural Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1. Multi domain coordination via Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2. Virtualization/Abstraction function . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3. Customer mapping function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.4. Virtual Network Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. Interface Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Realizing ACTN with PCE (and PCEP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Relationship to PCE based central control . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction
1.1. Path Computation Element (PCE)
The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) [RFC5440]
provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) [RFC4655] to
perform path computations in response to Path Computation Clients
(PCCs) requests.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
The ability to compute shortest constrained TE LSPs in Multiprotocol
Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) networks across
multiple domains has been identified as a key motivation for PCE
development.
A stateful PCE [RFC8231] is capable of considering, for the purposes
of path computation, not only the network state in terms of links and
nodes (referred to as the Traffic Engineering Database or TED) but
also the status of active services (previously computed paths, and
currently reserved resources, stored in the Label Switched Paths
Database (LSP-DB).
[RFC8051] describes general considerations for a stateful PCE
deployment and examines its applicability and benefits, as well as
its challenges and limitations through a number of use cases.
[RFC8231] describes a set of extensions to PCEP to provide stateful
control. A stateful PCE has access to not only the information
carried by the network's Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), but also
the set of active paths and their reserved resources for its
computations. The additional state allows the PCE to compute
constrained paths while considering individual LSPs and their
interactions. [RFC8281] describes the setup, maintenance and
teardown of PCE-initiated LSPs under the stateful PCE model.
[RFC8231] also describes the active stateful PCE. The active PCE
functionality allows a PCE to reroute an existing LSP or make changes
to the attributes of an existing LSP, or a PCC to delegate control of
specific LSPs to a new PCE.
1.1.1. Role of PCE in SDN
Software-Defined Networking (SDN) refers to a separation between the
control elements and the forwarding components so that software
running in a centralized system called a controller, can act to
program the devices in the network to behave in specific ways. A
required element in an SDN architecture is a component that plans how
the network resources will be used and how the devices will be
programmed. It is possible to view this component as performing
specific computations to place flows within the network given
knowledge of the availability of network resources, how other
forwarding devices are programmed, and the way that other flows are
routed. It is concluded in [RFC7399], that this is the same function
that a PCE might offer in a network operated using a dynamic control
plane. This is the function and purpose of a PCE, and the way that a
PCE integrates into a wider network control system including SDN is
presented in Application-Based Network Operation (ABNO) [RFC7491].
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
1.1.2. PCE in multi-domain and multi-layer deployments
Computing paths across large multi-domain environments require
special computational components and cooperation between entities in
different domains capable of complex path computation. The PCE
provides an architecture and a set of functional components to
address this problem space. A PCE may be used to compute end-to-end
paths across multi-domain environments using a per-domain path
computation technique [RFC5152]. The Backward recursive PCE based
path computation (BRPC) mechanism [RFC5441] defines a PCE-based path
computation procedure to compute inter-domain constrained MPLS and
GMPLS TE networks. However, both per-domain and BRPC techniques
assume that the sequence of domains to be crossed from source to
destination is known, either fixed by the network operator or
obtained by other means.
[RFC6805] describes a Hierarchical PCE (H-PCE) architecture which can
be used for computing end-to-end paths for inter-domain MPLS Traffic
Engineering (TE) and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) when the
domain sequence is not known. Within the Hierarchical PCE (H-PCE)
architecture, the Parent PCE (P-PCE) is used to compute a multi-
domain path based on the domain connectivity information. A Child
PCE (C-PCE) may be responsible for a single domain or multiple
domains, it is used to compute the intra-domain path based on its
domain topology information.
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce] state the considerations for stateful
PCE(s) in hierarchical PCE architecture. In particular, the behavior
changes and additions to the existing stateful PCE mechanisms
(including PCE- initiated LSP setup and active PCE usage) in the
context of networks using the H-PCE architecture.
[RFC5623] describes a framework for applying the PCE-based
architecture to inter-layer to (G)MPLS TE. It provides suggestions
for the deployment of PCE in support of multi-layer networks. It
also describes the relationship between PCE and a functional
component in charge of the control and management of the VNT, called
the Virtual Network Topology Manager (VNTM).
1.2. Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-requirements] describes the high-level ACTN
requirements. [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework] describes the
architecture model for ACTN including the entities (Customer Network
Controller(CNC), Multi-domain Service Coordinator(MDSC), and
Provisioning Network Controller (PNC) and their interfaces.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
The ACTN reference architecture identified a three-tier control
hierarchy as depicted in Figure 1:
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| CNC | | CNC | | CNC |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+
\ | /
Business \ | /
Boundary =============\==============|==============/============
Between \ | /
Customer & ------- | CMI -------
Network Provider \ | /
+---------------+
| MDSC |
+---------------+
/ | \
------------ | MPI -------------
/ | \
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| PNC | | PNC | | PNC |
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| SBI / | / \
| / | SBI / \
--------- ----- | / \
( ) ( ) | / \
- Control - ( Phys. ) | / -----
( Plane ) ( Net ) | / ( )
( Physical ) ----- | / ( Phys. )
( Network ) ----- ----- ( Net )
- - ( ) ( ) -----
( ) ( Phys. ) ( Phys. )
--------- ( Net ) ( Net )
----- -----
CMI - (CNC-MDSC Interface)
MPI - (MDSC-PNC Interface)
Figure 1: ACTN Hierarchy
The two interfaces with respect to the MDSC, one north of the MDSC
(CMI CNC-MDSC Interface) and one south (MPI MDSC-PNC Interface). A
hierarchy of MDSC is possible with a recursive MPI interface.
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-info-model] provides an information model for
ACTN interfaces.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
1.3. PCE and ACTN
This document examines the PCE and ACTN architecture and describes
how the PCE architecture is applicable to ACTN. It also lists the
PCEP extensions that are needed to use PCEP as an ACTN interface.
This document also identifies any gaps in PCEP, that exist at the
time of publication of this document.
2. Architectural Considerations
ACTN [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework] architecture is based on
hierarchy and recursiveness of controllers. It defines three types
of controllers (depending on the functionalities they implement).
The main functionalities are -
o Multi domain coordination function
o Virtualization/Abstraction function
o Customer mapping/translation function
o Virtual service coordination function
Section 3 of [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework] describes these
functions.
It should be noted that, this document lists all possible ways in
which PCEP could be used for each of the above functions, but all
functions are not required to be implemented via PCEP. Operator may
choose to use the PCEP for multi domain coordination via stateful
H-PCE but use RESTCONF [RFC8040] or BGP-LS [RFC7752] to get the
topology and support virtualization/abstraction function.
2.1. Multi domain coordination via Hierarchy
With the definition of domain being "everything that is under the
control of the single logical controller", as per
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework], it is needed to have a control entity
that oversees the specific aspects of the different domains and to
build a single abstracted end-to-end network topology in order to
coordinate end-to-end path computation and path/service provisioning.
The MDSC in ACTN framework realizes this function by coordinating the
per-domain PNCs in a hierarchy of controllers. It also needs to
detach from the underlying network technology and express customer
concerns by business needs.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
[RFC6805] and [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce] describes a hierarchy of
PCE with Parent PCE coordinating multi-domain path computation
function between Child PCE(s). It is easy to see how these
principles align, and thus how stateful H-PCE architecture can be
used to realize ACTN.
The Per domain stitched LSP in the Hierarchical stateful PCE
architecture, described in Section 3.3.1 of
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce] is well suited for multi-domain
coordination function. This includes domain sequence selection; E2E
path computation; Controller (PCE) initiated path setup and
reporting. This is also applicable to multi-layer coordination in
case of IP+optical networks.
[I-D.litkowski-pce-state-sync]" describes the procedures to allow a
stateful communication between PCEs for various use-cases. The
procedures and extensions are also applicable to Child and Parent PCE
communication and thus useful for ACTN as well.
2.2. Virtualization/Abstraction function
To realize ACTN, an abstracted view of the underlying network
resources needs to be built. This includes global network-wide
abstracted topology based on the underlying network resources of each
domain. This also include abstract topology created as per the
customer service connectivity requests and represented as a network
slice allocated to each customer.
In order to compute and provide optimal paths, PCEs require an
accurate and timely Traffic Engineering Database (TED).
Traditionally this TED has been obtained from a link state (LS)
routing protocol supporting traffic engineering extensions. PCE may
construct its TED by participating in the IGP ([RFC3630] and
[RFC5305] for MPLS-TE; [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] for GMPLS). An
alternative is offered by BGP-LS [RFC7752].
In case of H-PCE [RFC6805], the parent PCE needs to build the domain
topology map of the child domains and their interconnectivity.
[RFC6805] and [I-D.ietf-pce-inter-area-as-applicability] suggest that
BGP-LS could be used as a "northbound" TE advertisement from the
child PCE to the parent PCE.
[I-D.dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls] proposes another approaches for learning
and maintaining the Link-State and TE information as an alternative
to IGPs and BGP flooding, using PCEP itself. The child PCE can use
this mechanism to transport Link-State and TE information from child
PCE to a Parent PCE using PCEP.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
In ACTN, there is a need to control the level of abstraction based on
the deployment scenario and business relationship between the
controllers. The mechanism used to disseminate information from PNC
(child PCE) to MDSC (parent PCE) should support abstraction.
[I-D.lee-teas-actn-abstraction] describes a few alternative
approaches of abstraction. The resulting abstracted topology can be
encoded using the PCEP-LS mechanisms [I-D.dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls] and
its optical network extension [I-D.lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical]. PCEP-LS
is an attractive option when the operator would wish to have a single
control plane protocol (PCEP) to achieve ACTN functions.
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework] discusses two ways to build abstract
topology from an MDSC standpoint with interaction with PNCs. The
primary method is called authomatic generation of abstract topology
by configuration. with this method, automatic generation is based on
the abstraction/summarization of the whole domain by the PNC and its
advertisement on the MPI. The seconday method is called on-demand
generation of supplementary topology via Path Compute Request/Reply.
This method may be needed to obtain further complementary information
such as potential connectivity from child PCEs in order to facilitate
an end-to-end path provisioning. PCEP is well suited to support both
methods.
2.3. Customer mapping function
In ACTN, there is a need to map customer virtual network (VN)
requirements into network provisioning request to the PNC. That is,
the customer requests/commands are mapped into network provisioning
requests that can be sent to the PNC. Specifically, it provides
mapping and translation of a customer's service request into a set of
parameters that are specific to a network type and technology such
that network configuration process is made possible.
[RFC8281] describes the setup, maintenance and teardown of PCE-
initiated LSPs under the stateful PCE model, without the need for
local configuration on the PCC, thus allowing for a dynamic network
that is centrally controlled and deployed. To instantiate or delete
an LSP, the PCE sends the Path Computation LSP Initiate Request
(PCInitiate) message to the PCC. As described in
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce], for inter-domain LSP in Hierarchical
PCE architecture, the initiation operations can be carried out at the
parent PCE. In which case after parent PCE finishes the E2E path
computation, it can send the PCInitiate message to the child PCE, the
child PCE further propagates the initiate request to the LSR. The
customer request is received by the MDSC (parent PCE) and based on
the business logic, global abstracted topology, network conditions
and local policy, the MDSC (parent PCE) translates this into per
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
domain LSP initiation request that a PNC (child PCE) can understand
and act on. This can be done via the PCInitiate message.
PCEP extensions for associating opaque policy between PCEP peer
[I-D.ietf-pce-association-policy] can be used.
2.4. Virtual Network Operations
Virtual service coordination function in ACTN incorporates customer
service-related information into the virtual network service
operations in order to seamlessly operate virtual networks while
meeting customer's service requirements.
[I-D.leedhody-pce-vn-association] describes the need for associating
a set of LSPs with a VN "construct" to facilitate VN operations in
PCE architecture. This association allows the PCEs to identify which
LSPs belong to a certain VN.
This association based on VN is useful for various optimizations at
the VN level which can be applied to all the LSPs that are part of
the VN slice. During path computation, the impact of a path for an
LSP is compared against the paths of other LSPs in the VN. This is
to make sure that the overall optimization and SLA of the VN rather
than of a single LSP. Similarly, during re-optimization, advanced
path computation algorithm and optimization technique can be
considered for all the LSPs belonging to a VN/customer and optimize
them all together.
3. Interface Considerations
As per [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework], to allow virtualization and
multi domain coordination, the network has to provide open,
programmable interfaces, in which customer applications can create,
replace and modify virtual network resources and services in an
interactive, flexible and dynamic fashion while having no impact on
other customers. The 3 ACTN interfaces are -
o The CNC-MDSC Interface (CMI) is an interface between a Customer
Network Controller and a Multi Domain Service Coordinator. It
requests the creation of the network resources, topology or
services for the applications. The MDSC may also report potential
network topology availability if queried for current capability
from the Customer Network Controller.
o The MDSC-PNC Interface (MPI) is an interface between a Multi
Domain Service Coordinator and a Provisioning Network Controller.
It communicates the creation request, if required, of new
connectivity of bandwidth changes in the physical network, via the
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
PNC. In multi-domain environments, the MDSC needs to establish
multiple MPIs, one for each PNC, as there are multiple PNCs
responsible for its domain control.
o In case of hierarchy of MDSC, the MPI is applied recursively.
From an abstraction point of view, the top level MDSC which
interfaces the CNC operates on a higher level of abstraction
(i.e., less granular level) than the lower level MSDCs.
PCEP is especially suitable on the MPI as it meets the requirement
and the functions as set out in the ACTN framework
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework]. Its recursive nature is well suited
via the multi-level hierarchy of PCE. PCEP can also be applied to
the CMI as the CNC can be a path computation client while the MDSC
can be a path computation server. The Section 4 describe how PCE and
PCEP could help realize ACTN on the MPI.
4. Realizing ACTN with PCE (and PCEP)
As per the example in the Figure 2, there are 4 domains, each with
its own PNC and a MDSC at top. The PNC and MDSC need PCE as a
important function. The PNC (or child PCE) already uses PCEP to
communicate to the network device. It can utilize the PCEP as the
MPI to communicate between controllers too.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
******
..........*MDSC*..............................
. ****** .. MPI .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
v v v .
****** ****** ****** .
*PNC1* *PNC2* *PNC4* .
****** ****** ****** .
+---------------+ +---------------+ +---------------+ .
|A |----| |----| C| .
| | | | | | .
|DOMAIN 1 |----|DOMAIN 2 |----|DOMAIN 4 | .
+------------B13+ +---------------+ +B43------------+ .
\ / .
\ ****** / .
\ *PNC3* Parent PCE
PNC -> Child PCE
MPI -> PCEP
Figure 2: ACTN with PCE
o Building Domain Topology at MDSC: PNC (or child PCE) needs to have
the TED to compute path in its domain. As described in
Section 2.2, it can learn the topology via IGP or BGP-LS. PCEP-LS
is also a proposed mechanism to carry link state and traffic
engineering information within PCEP. A mechanism to carry
abstracted topology while hiding technology specific information
between PNC and MDSC is described in [I-D.dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls].
At the end of this step the MDSC (or parent PCE) has the
abstracted topology from each of its PNC (or child PCE). This
could be as simple as a domain topology map as described in
[RFC6805] or it can have full topology information of all domains.
The latter is not scalable and thus an abstracted topology of each
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
domain interconnected by inter-domain links is the most common
case.
* Topology Change: When the PNC learns of any topology change,
the PNC needs to decide if the change needs to be notified to
the MDSC. This is dependent on the level of abstraction
between the MDSC and the PNC.
o VN Instantiate: MDSC is requested to instantiate a VN, the minimal
information that is required would be a VN identifier and a set of
end points. Various path computation, setup constraints and
objective functions may also be provided. In PCE terms, a VN
Instantiate can be considered as a set of paths belonging to the
same VN. As described in Section 2.4 and
[I-D.leedhody-pce-vn-association] the VN association can help in
identifying the set of paths that belong to a VN. The rest of the
information like the endpoints, constraints and objective function
is already defined in PCEP in terms of a single path.
* Path Computation: As per the example in the Figure 2, the VN
instantiate requires two end to end paths between (A in Domain
1 to B in Domain 3) and (A in Domain 1 to C in Domain 4). The
MDSC (or parent PCE) triggers the end to end path computation
for these two paths. MDSC can do path computation based on the
abstracted domain topology that it already has or it may use
the H-PCE procedures (Section 2.1) using the PCReq and PCRep
messages to get the end to end path with the help of the child
PCEs (PNC). Either way, the resulted E2E paths may be broken
into per-domain paths.
* A-B: (A-B13,B13-B31,B31-B)
* A-C: (A-B13,B13-B31,B34-B43,B43-C)
* Per Domain Path Instantiation: Based on the above path
computation, MDSC can issue the path instantiation request to
each PNC via PCInitiate message (see
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce] and
[I-D.leedhody-pce-vn-association]). A suitable stitching
mechanism would be used to stitch these per domain LSPs. One
such mechanism is described in
[I-D.lee-pce-lsp-stitching-hpce], where PCEP is extended to
support stitching in stateful H-PCE context.
* Per Domain Path Report: Each PNC should report the status of
the per-domain LSP to the MDSC via PCRpt message, as per the
Hierarchy of stateful PCE ([I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce]). The
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
status of the end to end LSP (A-B and A-C) is made up when all
the per domain LSP are reported up by the PNCs.
* Delegation: It is suggested that the per domain LSPs are
delegated to respective PNC, so that they can control the path
and attributes based on each domain network conditions.
* State Synchronization: The state needs to be synchronized
between the parent PCE and child PCE. The mechanism described
in [I-D.litkowski-pce-state-sync] can be used.
o VN Modify: MDSC is requested to modify a VN, for example the
bandwidth for VN is increased. This may trigger path computation
at MDSC as described in the previous step and can trigger an
update to existing per-intra-domain path (via PCUpd message) or
creation (or deletion) of a per-domain path (via PCInitiate
message). As described in [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce], this
should be done in make-before-break fashion.
o VN Delete: MDSC is requested to delete a VN, in this case, based
on the E2E paths and the resulting per-domain paths need to be
removed (via PCInitiate message).
o VN Update (based on network changes): Any change in the per-domain
LSP are reported to the MDSC (via PCRpt message) as per
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce]. This may result in changes in the
E2E path or VN status. This may also trigger a re-optimization
leading to a new per-domain path, update to existing path, or
deletion of the path.
o VN Protection: The VN protection/restoration requirements, need to
applied to each E2E path as well as each per domain path. The
MDSC needs to play a crucial role in coordinating the right
protection/restoration policy across each PNC. The existing
protection/restoration mechanism of PCEP can be applied on each
path.
o In case PNC generates an abstract topology to the MDSC, the
PCInitiate/PCUpd messages from the MDSC to a PNC will contain a
path with abstract nodes and links. PNC would need to take that
as an input for path computation to get a path with physical nodes
and links. Similarly PNC would convert the path received from the
device (with physical nodes and links) into abstract path (based
on the abstract topology generated before with abstract nodes and
links) and reported to the MDSC.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
5. Relationship to PCE based central control
[RFC8283] introduces the architecture for PCE as a central controller
(PCECC), it further examines the motivations and applicability for
PCEP as a southbound interface, and introduces the implications for
the protocol. The section 2.1.3 of [RFC8283] describe an hierarchy
of PCE-based controller as per the Hierarchy of PCE framework defined
in [RFC6805]. Both ACTN and PCECC is based on the same basic
framework and thus compatible with each other.
6. IANA Considerations
This is an informational document and thus does not have any IANA
allocations to be made.
7. Security Considerations
The ACTN framework described in [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework]
defines key components and interfaces for managed traffic engineered
networks. It also list various security considerations such as
request and control of resources, confidentially of the information,
and availability of function which should be taken into
consideration.
When PCEP is used on the MPI, this interface needs to be secured, use
of [RFC8253] is RECOMENDED. Each PCEP extension listed in this
document, presents its individual security considerations, which
continue to apply.
8. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Jonathan Hardwick for the inspiration
behind this document. Further thanks to Avantika for her comments
with suggested text.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
9.2. Informative References
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
.
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, DOI 10.17487/RFC4203, October 2005,
.
[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation
Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,
.
[RFC5152] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Ayyangar, A., Ed., and R. Zhang, "A
Per-Domain Path Computation Method for Establishing Inter-
Domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths
(LSPs)", RFC 5152, DOI 10.17487/RFC5152, February 2008,
.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
2008, .
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,
.
[RFC5441] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Zhang, R., Bitar, N., and JL. Le Roux,
"A Backward-Recursive PCE-Based Computation (BRPC)
Procedure to Compute Shortest Constrained Inter-Domain
Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths", RFC 5441,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5441, April 2009,
.
[RFC5623] Oki, E., Takeda, T., Le Roux, JL., and A. Farrel,
"Framework for PCE-Based Inter-Layer MPLS and GMPLS
Traffic Engineering", RFC 5623, DOI 10.17487/RFC5623,
September 2009, .
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
[RFC6805] King, D., Ed. and A. Farrel, Ed., "The Application of the
Path Computation Element Architecture to the Determination
of a Sequence of Domains in MPLS and GMPLS", RFC 6805,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6805, November 2012,
.
[RFC7399] Farrel, A. and D. King, "Unanswered Questions in the Path
Computation Element Architecture", RFC 7399,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7399, October 2014,
.
[RFC7491] King, D. and A. Farrel, "A PCE-Based Architecture for
Application-Based Network Operations", RFC 7491,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7491, March 2015,
.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
.
[RFC8051] Zhang, X., Ed. and I. Minei, Ed., "Applicability of a
Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE)", RFC 8051,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8051, January 2017,
.
[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
.
[RFC8253] Lopez, D., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Wu, Q., and D. Dhody,
"PCEPS: Usage of TLS to Provide a Secure Transport for the
Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)",
RFC 8253, DOI 10.17487/RFC8253, October 2017,
.
[RFC8281] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Sivabalan, S., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE
Model", RFC 8281, DOI 10.17487/RFC8281, December 2017,
.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
[RFC8283] Farrel, A., Ed., Zhao, Q., Ed., Li, Z., and C. Zhou, "An
Architecture for Use of PCE and the PCE Communication
Protocol (PCEP) in a Network with Central Control",
RFC 8283, DOI 10.17487/RFC8283, December 2017,
.
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-hpce]
Dhody, D., Lee, Y., Ceccarelli, D., Shin, J., King, D.,
and O. Dios, "Hierarchical Stateful Path Computation
Element (PCE).", draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-04 (work in
progress), March 2018.
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-requirements]
Lee, Y., Ceccarelli, D., Miyasaka, T., Shin, J., and K.
Lee, "Requirements for Abstraction and Control of TE
Networks", draft-ietf-teas-actn-requirements-09 (work in
progress), March 2018.
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-framework]
Ceccarelli, D. and Y. Lee, "Framework for Abstraction and
Control of Traffic Engineered Networks", draft-ietf-teas-
actn-framework-11 (work in progress), October 2017.
[I-D.ietf-teas-actn-info-model]
Lee, Y., Belotti, S., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., and B.
Yoon, "Information Model for Abstraction and Control of TE
Networks (ACTN)", draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-07 (work
in progress), February 2018.
[I-D.ietf-pce-inter-area-as-applicability]
King, D., Meuric, J., Dugeon, O., Zhao, Q., Dhody, D., and
O. Dios, "Applicability of the Path Computation Element to
Inter-Area and Inter-AS MPLS and GMPLS Traffic
Engineering", draft-ietf-pce-inter-area-as-
applicability-06 (work in progress), July 2016.
[I-D.dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls]
Dhody, D., Lee, Y., and D. Ceccarelli, "PCEP Extension for
Distribution of Link-State and TE Information.", draft-
dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls-10 (work in progress), March 2018.
[I-D.lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical]
Lee, Y., zhenghaomian@huawei.com, z., Ceccarelli, D.,
weiw@bupt.edu.cn, w., Park, P., and B. Yoon, "PCEP
Extension for Distribution of Link-State and TE
information for Optical Networks", draft-lee-pce-pcep-ls-
optical-04 (work in progress), February 2018.
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
[I-D.leedhody-pce-vn-association]
Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Zhang, X., and D. Ceccarelli, "PCEP
Extensions for Establishing Relationships Between Sets of
LSPs and Virtual Networks", draft-leedhody-pce-vn-
association-04 (work in progress), February 2018.
[I-D.litkowski-pce-state-sync]
Litkowski, S., Sivabalan, S., and D. Dhody, "Inter
Stateful Path Computation Element communication
procedures", draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync-02 (work in
progress), August 2017.
[I-D.ietf-pce-association-policy]
Dhody, D., Sivabalan, S., Litkowski, S., Tantsura, J., and
J. Hardwick, "Path Computation Element communication
Protocol extension for associating Policies and LSPs",
draft-ietf-pce-association-policy-02 (work in progress),
February 2018.
[I-D.lee-teas-actn-abstraction]
Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., and O. Dios,
"Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) Abstraction
Methods", draft-lee-teas-actn-abstraction-02 (work in
progress), June 2017.
[I-D.lee-pce-lsp-stitching-hpce]
Lee, Y., Dhody, D., and D. Ceccarelli, "PCEP Extensions
for Stitching LSPs in Hierarchical Stateful PCE Model",
draft-lee-pce-lsp-stitching-hpce-01 (work in progress),
December 2017.
Authors' Addresses
Dhruv Dhody
Huawei Technologies
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
Bangalore, Karnataka 560066
India
EMail: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft PCE-ACTN March 2018
Young Lee
Huawei Technologies
5340 Legacy Drive, Building 3
Plano, TX 75023
USA
EMail: leeyoung@huawei.com
Daniele Ceccarelli
Ericsson
Torshamnsgatan,48
Stockholm
Sweden
EMail: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com
Dhody, et al. Expires September 6, 2018 [Page 19]